Let's try and get 1,000,000 replies to this post
- Thread starter The Ancient Mariner
- Start date
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Today I had my first 90 minutes football training session this autumn. I'll be happy if I can get out of bed tomorrow.
Travis The Dragon
AFTERGLOW!!!
I'd gladly smoke one with them!But Bush and Obama have both admitted to smoking pot, how can they be the worst?
Travis The Dragon
AFTERGLOW!!!
In my generation, Regan was the best we ever had.
JudasMyGuide
Ancient Mariner
Me, I'm the usual cliché - Abe and JFK. Each for his own reasons, mostly the usual ones, and I guess anyone would expect that choice from me.
I honestly don't know what to think about both Bush Jr and Obama, since my knowledge of American politics is - as usual - twenty years behind. For example, I'm still not sure what exactly is Obamacare (or how is it different from your typical European social security) and why should it be a bad thing. Not sparking a discussion, not here at least, I'm just saying.
Oh, and I still don't know what do "we can". But I guess that's, like, the point, right?
I honestly don't know what to think about both Bush Jr and Obama, since my knowledge of American politics is - as usual - twenty years behind. For example, I'm still not sure what exactly is Obamacare (or how is it different from your typical European social security) and why should it be a bad thing. Not sparking a discussion, not here at least, I'm just saying.
Oh, and I still don't know what do "we can". But I guess that's, like, the point, right?
The Flash
Dennis Wilcock did 9/11
I'd go with FDR over JFK, though his handling of the Japanese population during the war is very questionable.
George W. Bush is easily one of the worst presidents and this is not just a Democratic point of view. Led the country through a meaningless war, handled Hurricane Katrina pretty badly and his economic policies led to a crisis. Barack Obama was an okay president, not great, not terrible. Some good advances in terms of civil liberties, normalizing relations with Cuba but atrocious handling of Middle East affairs.
I do believe presidents from both parties tend to sacrifice a lot of their beliefs and ideals after being elected into office, probably due to two reasons: U.S. politics is influenced so much by the interest of corporations and big money players that it's an oligarchy at this point, and U.S. strives to preserve its superpower status, which tends to jeopardize the well being of the peoples of other countries.
Just one example, Senator Barack Obama was adamant about the recognition of Armenian Genocide. President Obama stopped short of calling it genocide throughout his presidency. The reason is to not annoy Turkey and create a movement that'd push Turkey towards paying reperations, because Turkey is a major ally in the Middle East while noone really gives a shit about Armenia. Sad but true.
George W. Bush is easily one of the worst presidents and this is not just a Democratic point of view. Led the country through a meaningless war, handled Hurricane Katrina pretty badly and his economic policies led to a crisis. Barack Obama was an okay president, not great, not terrible. Some good advances in terms of civil liberties, normalizing relations with Cuba but atrocious handling of Middle East affairs.
I do believe presidents from both parties tend to sacrifice a lot of their beliefs and ideals after being elected into office, probably due to two reasons: U.S. politics is influenced so much by the interest of corporations and big money players that it's an oligarchy at this point, and U.S. strives to preserve its superpower status, which tends to jeopardize the well being of the peoples of other countries.
Just one example, Senator Barack Obama was adamant about the recognition of Armenian Genocide. President Obama stopped short of calling it genocide throughout his presidency. The reason is to not annoy Turkey and create a movement that'd push Turkey towards paying reperations, because Turkey is a major ally in the Middle East while noone really gives a shit about Armenia. Sad but true.
Last edited:
JudasMyGuide
Ancient Mariner
On the other hand, while he was elected by a very slight margin the first time around, the re-election was much more unanimous and his approval ratings after 9/11 were quite high, IIRC, despite Michael Moore and his F911, so he must have been doing something right. At first at least.
That Armenian Genocide situation in general pisses me off. On the other hand, I realise that as a US president you must do more compromises than you thought you would. And not only regarding the foreign policy.
The problem is (and funnily enough I've seen that most with Obama) when some see him as a true Saint and sing Hosanna at his face, whereas the other half is so critical/afraid of him that it slips into a stealth parody. (*cough *cough "birthers", anyone?) - "So, three and a half years later ... Obama has not revealed himself to be a Sumerian deity that only feeds on NRA membership cards."
That's one of the reasons why I refrain from commenting on him, apart from saying I like the fact there's been a black president already.
Though, whatever his strong and weak points are, his luck wasn't the best - "Congratulations on becoming President of the United States! Now you have to deal with a recession, two wars, crumbling infrastructure, very angry people on both sides, healthcare reform, myriad foreign affairs difficulties, environmental degradation of various types... good luck! Obama himself once joked that this might be the first time the winner of an election would have reason to ask for a recount. The Onion ran an article after he was elected with the headline "Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job.
"The "Birther" movement claims that US President Barack Obama is not a natural-born American citizen, which would make him ineligible for the position he currently occupies. The name "Birther" comes from the fact that they believe his birth certificate to be a forgery, and that his real birth certificate (which he is supposedly hiding) proves that he was born in Kenya/Indonesia/wherever. This rumor was started during the 2008 campaign by some of the angrier supporters of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who were upset that she was losing the Democratic primary to Obama, and was picked up by many on the far-right fringe after Obama was elected. In order for this claim to work, it would require either
a) planning by Them going back half a century (Honolulu newspapers reported his birth - http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr147/spazeman/obama-birth.gif), in a time when the idea of a non-white President was laughable, as well as a lot of natural charm, brilliance and political success on the part of their supposed puppet to actually get elected 47 years later, or
b) Obama not only successfully forging his long-form birth certificate, but also fabricating those newspaper announcements, fabricating his college records, bribing immigration officials, and bribing or fooling election officials.
For the record, under current laws, anyone born to an American citizen is also a natural-born American citizen, no matter where this occurred. The President was born before this law was implemented, but even under the statutes he was born under, he only needs to spend a few years in the United States to claim natural-born citizenship; his academic record alone validates that claim. Some claim that being a natural-born citizen isn't enough — you must actually be born in the US to run for President. This is in spite of the fact that the Constitution does not make such a requirement, only requiring
a) either natural-born citizen status or being a citizen of the US at the time the constitution was ratified (the latter doesn't apply anymore, but it's why George Washington was allowed to be president despite not being a natural born citizen),
b) having lived in the US for fourteen years, and c) being at least 35 years old. Even if there were a "born on US soil" requirement, there is ample evidence confirming that Obama was born in Hawai'i.
One variation claims that, since Obama's father (a native of British Kenya) held British citizenship at the time of his son's birth, then Obama holds dual US and British citizenship, which they feel would make him ineligible even if he was a natural-born citizen. Problem is, there is nothing in the Constitution saying that dual citizenship makes a candidate ineligible, and even if there was, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution (which says "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside...") would override it. Other claims allege that Obama's mother had renounced her US citizenship and, by extension, her son's (she hadn't, and even if she did it wouldn't have affected Obama's status), that a trip by Obama to Pakistan in 1981 could only have been accomplished with a foreign passport due to an alleged ban on travel between the US and Pakistan (no such ban existed), and that Obama's enrollment in a school in Indonesia in his youth could only have been done if he wasn't a US citizen at the time (living outside the US as a minor, as ruled in Perkins v. Elg, does not cause you to lose your citizenship).
Another variation claims that Obama being born in Hawaii means that he's not a natural-born citizen, the argument being that Hawaii is not legally part of the US, but rather, is an independent kingdom under US occupation — and therefore, nobody who was born there can claim natural-born US citizenship unless they meet one of the other requirements for it. The fact that Hawaii is as much a state as Ohio is lost on the people making this claim. And as shown above, he does meet the criteria.
Amusing bit of trivia — Obama's 2008 opponent, John McCain, was born in the Panama Canal Zone (or Panama itself, some believe), meaning that, by some variants on this theory, he too is ineligible to be President. Of course, this ignores the fact that his father was a serving US naval officer, stationed in Panama, which means that McCain automatically is a natural-born citizen (though retroactively; the laws allowing for this were only passed after he was born).
This issue also arose when George Romney, Governor of Michigan (and Mitt Romney's father) ran for President in 1968, since he was born in Mexico to American parents. However, Romney dropped out of the race before it became an issue.
Another amusing bit of trivia: their arguments have now been turned against them when Ted Cruz decided to run for president: Cruz was born in Canada. This has led to a lawsuit and a debate on what 'natural born citizen' means. (He's considered a US citizen because his mother was one when she gave birth to him, but the Constitution specifies that the president must be a 'natural born citizen'.)
One moderately well-known politician and statesman, Sir Winston Churchill, could legitimately have claimed US citizenship via an American-born mother. Would there have been such an uproar about his being born overseas had he tried standing for public office in the USA? And the British people were not in the least concerned by his being 50% foreign (actually, slightly less than 50%, since his father's mother was also an American)... the question never arose. Maybe more important things got in the way.
U.S. law at the time of the marriage of Churchill's parents would have resulted in the loss of his mother's U.S. citizenship. A 1963 U.S. law made him an "honorary" U.S. citizen.
Ironically, when the Birthers produced a birth certificate of their own claiming that Obama had been born in Kenya, it was found to be a forgery, due to several instances of shoddy research. For one, it listed his birthplace as "Mombasa, Republic of Kenya", even though a) in 1961, the year of Obama's birth, Mombasa was a part of Zanzibar, not Kenya, and b) Kenya was still a British colony at the time, not a republic. In addition, the format of the certificate bore no resemblance to that used in Kenya at the time. It was shown to be an altered version of a birth certificate issued in South Australia in 1959.
Similarly there's a badly photoshopped and anachronistic picture of a Columbia University I.D. that Obama supposedly used as a foreign student under the name "Barry Soetoro" (Soetoro is the last name of his stepfather).
Talking about Obama's birth some claim that he was born to unmarried parents or to put it crudely a bastard. Oddly enough most of the claims would make him a natural-born American as opposed to most of the birther claims. These include:
That Barack Obama, Senior, and Anne Dunham never married which has created similar demands to the birthers of "release the (wedding) certificate" from those who follow the theory.
Or that Obama Sr was a polygamist and already married when he married Dunham thus invalidating the marriage.
That he was born from an affair to Frank Marshall Davis because of some contact Davis had with Obama's family.
Or that Malcolm X (no really) fathered him and this is usually followed by claims that makes him a militant Angry Black Man.
An unrelated theory that some of Obama's more radical detractors maintain is the belief that he is secretly a Muslim who was educated in an Islamic madrassa (religious school), despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (Extreme versions of this theory go so far as to say that he is a Muslim that has been "planted" in the White House by some government or radical group in the Middle East.) Among the evidence that proves otherwise is the fact that his wedding was conducted by a Protestant minister, his children were baptised by the same minister (and there were dozens of witnesses to both ceremonies) and there have been public events where he has eaten food (on camera) that is taboo to Islam. (Not to mention that he works on Ramadan and like most Democrats, publically supports gay marriage, both practically unheard of among Muslims.) In addition, the alleged "madrassa" in Indonesia that he attended was, in fact, a secular public elementary school.
Conversely, one theory claims that Obama is actually a closeted gay man who's secretly married to a Pakistani guy. Most of the "proof" for this theory comes from a 1990 article by the Harvard Law Revue, which is not a news magazine, but is in fact an Onion-esque parody of the Harvard Law Review (which Obama was editor of at the time). How Obama could've been married to another man in 1990, fourteen years before Massachusetts legalized gay marriage (and eleven years before any country legalized same-sex marriage), goes unanswered.
A tamer rumor about Mr. Obama, circulated on websites like The Free Republic, American Thinker, and World Net Daily, is that educator and former radical Bill Ayers helped him write Dreams of My Father. There is no evidence to support this claim.
During Obama and Biden's 2008 campaign, people began to claim they were actually moles planted by Osama bin Laden. Why? Because when you put their names together (as they would be on campaign signs and the like), it looks a bit like "Osama bin Laden". Why bin Laden would call attention to the fact that he had the most powerful man in the world under his thumb... generally went unexplained.
Even First Lady Michelle Obama has been targeted by an outlandish claim. Some say that she ordered her husband's female aide (who supporters of this claim also say was his lover) banished to the Carribean. Everyone involved (including the aide herself) say this is false.
Then there's the other outlandish claim that Michelle was born a man and is transgender.
Then there are some really crazy ones about him, like how the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez funded his election campaign, or this claim that he's The Antichrist (connected to the one about him being a Muslim), or that he planned to start "youth re-education camps" (first suggested by Representative Michelle Bachmann), or even one that claims there was a hidden message in his acceptance speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention telling America to "Serve Satan". (Probably thought up by a Led Zeppelin fan who believed a similar rumor about "Stairway to Heaven".) People never seem to get tired of thinking stuff like this up.
The craziest likely came from Larry Sinclair, a petty criminal specializing in forgery, who spread wild accusations via YouTube involving gay sex, drugs and possible murder committed by the President. At one point reporters apparently took Sinclair seriously enough to attend a press conference he gave, most remarkable for his lawyer's appearance in a kilt, which he explained was intended to secure comfort for his unusually large sexual organs. As he claimed, "Those at the other end of the spectrum find [pants] quite confining." (Reporters quickly stopped taking him seriously after that.)
a) planning by Them going back half a century (Honolulu newspapers reported his birth - http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr147/spazeman/obama-birth.gif), in a time when the idea of a non-white President was laughable, as well as a lot of natural charm, brilliance and political success on the part of their supposed puppet to actually get elected 47 years later, or
b) Obama not only successfully forging his long-form birth certificate, but also fabricating those newspaper announcements, fabricating his college records, bribing immigration officials, and bribing or fooling election officials.
For the record, under current laws, anyone born to an American citizen is also a natural-born American citizen, no matter where this occurred. The President was born before this law was implemented, but even under the statutes he was born under, he only needs to spend a few years in the United States to claim natural-born citizenship; his academic record alone validates that claim. Some claim that being a natural-born citizen isn't enough — you must actually be born in the US to run for President. This is in spite of the fact that the Constitution does not make such a requirement, only requiring
a) either natural-born citizen status or being a citizen of the US at the time the constitution was ratified (the latter doesn't apply anymore, but it's why George Washington was allowed to be president despite not being a natural born citizen),
b) having lived in the US for fourteen years, and c) being at least 35 years old. Even if there were a "born on US soil" requirement, there is ample evidence confirming that Obama was born in Hawai'i.
One variation claims that, since Obama's father (a native of British Kenya) held British citizenship at the time of his son's birth, then Obama holds dual US and British citizenship, which they feel would make him ineligible even if he was a natural-born citizen. Problem is, there is nothing in the Constitution saying that dual citizenship makes a candidate ineligible, and even if there was, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution (which says "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside...") would override it. Other claims allege that Obama's mother had renounced her US citizenship and, by extension, her son's (she hadn't, and even if she did it wouldn't have affected Obama's status), that a trip by Obama to Pakistan in 1981 could only have been accomplished with a foreign passport due to an alleged ban on travel between the US and Pakistan (no such ban existed), and that Obama's enrollment in a school in Indonesia in his youth could only have been done if he wasn't a US citizen at the time (living outside the US as a minor, as ruled in Perkins v. Elg, does not cause you to lose your citizenship).
Another variation claims that Obama being born in Hawaii means that he's not a natural-born citizen, the argument being that Hawaii is not legally part of the US, but rather, is an independent kingdom under US occupation — and therefore, nobody who was born there can claim natural-born US citizenship unless they meet one of the other requirements for it. The fact that Hawaii is as much a state as Ohio is lost on the people making this claim. And as shown above, he does meet the criteria.
Amusing bit of trivia — Obama's 2008 opponent, John McCain, was born in the Panama Canal Zone (or Panama itself, some believe), meaning that, by some variants on this theory, he too is ineligible to be President. Of course, this ignores the fact that his father was a serving US naval officer, stationed in Panama, which means that McCain automatically is a natural-born citizen (though retroactively; the laws allowing for this were only passed after he was born).
This issue also arose when George Romney, Governor of Michigan (and Mitt Romney's father) ran for President in 1968, since he was born in Mexico to American parents. However, Romney dropped out of the race before it became an issue.
Another amusing bit of trivia: their arguments have now been turned against them when Ted Cruz decided to run for president: Cruz was born in Canada. This has led to a lawsuit and a debate on what 'natural born citizen' means. (He's considered a US citizen because his mother was one when she gave birth to him, but the Constitution specifies that the president must be a 'natural born citizen'.)
One moderately well-known politician and statesman, Sir Winston Churchill, could legitimately have claimed US citizenship via an American-born mother. Would there have been such an uproar about his being born overseas had he tried standing for public office in the USA? And the British people were not in the least concerned by his being 50% foreign (actually, slightly less than 50%, since his father's mother was also an American)... the question never arose. Maybe more important things got in the way.
U.S. law at the time of the marriage of Churchill's parents would have resulted in the loss of his mother's U.S. citizenship. A 1963 U.S. law made him an "honorary" U.S. citizen.
Ironically, when the Birthers produced a birth certificate of their own claiming that Obama had been born in Kenya, it was found to be a forgery, due to several instances of shoddy research. For one, it listed his birthplace as "Mombasa, Republic of Kenya", even though a) in 1961, the year of Obama's birth, Mombasa was a part of Zanzibar, not Kenya, and b) Kenya was still a British colony at the time, not a republic. In addition, the format of the certificate bore no resemblance to that used in Kenya at the time. It was shown to be an altered version of a birth certificate issued in South Australia in 1959.
Similarly there's a badly photoshopped and anachronistic picture of a Columbia University I.D. that Obama supposedly used as a foreign student under the name "Barry Soetoro" (Soetoro is the last name of his stepfather).
Talking about Obama's birth some claim that he was born to unmarried parents or to put it crudely a bastard. Oddly enough most of the claims would make him a natural-born American as opposed to most of the birther claims. These include:
That Barack Obama, Senior, and Anne Dunham never married which has created similar demands to the birthers of "release the (wedding) certificate" from those who follow the theory.
Or that Obama Sr was a polygamist and already married when he married Dunham thus invalidating the marriage.
That he was born from an affair to Frank Marshall Davis because of some contact Davis had with Obama's family.
Or that Malcolm X (no really) fathered him and this is usually followed by claims that makes him a militant Angry Black Man.
An unrelated theory that some of Obama's more radical detractors maintain is the belief that he is secretly a Muslim who was educated in an Islamic madrassa (religious school), despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (Extreme versions of this theory go so far as to say that he is a Muslim that has been "planted" in the White House by some government or radical group in the Middle East.) Among the evidence that proves otherwise is the fact that his wedding was conducted by a Protestant minister, his children were baptised by the same minister (and there were dozens of witnesses to both ceremonies) and there have been public events where he has eaten food (on camera) that is taboo to Islam. (Not to mention that he works on Ramadan and like most Democrats, publically supports gay marriage, both practically unheard of among Muslims.) In addition, the alleged "madrassa" in Indonesia that he attended was, in fact, a secular public elementary school.
Conversely, one theory claims that Obama is actually a closeted gay man who's secretly married to a Pakistani guy. Most of the "proof" for this theory comes from a 1990 article by the Harvard Law Revue, which is not a news magazine, but is in fact an Onion-esque parody of the Harvard Law Review (which Obama was editor of at the time). How Obama could've been married to another man in 1990, fourteen years before Massachusetts legalized gay marriage (and eleven years before any country legalized same-sex marriage), goes unanswered.
A tamer rumor about Mr. Obama, circulated on websites like The Free Republic, American Thinker, and World Net Daily, is that educator and former radical Bill Ayers helped him write Dreams of My Father. There is no evidence to support this claim.
During Obama and Biden's 2008 campaign, people began to claim they were actually moles planted by Osama bin Laden. Why? Because when you put their names together (as they would be on campaign signs and the like), it looks a bit like "Osama bin Laden". Why bin Laden would call attention to the fact that he had the most powerful man in the world under his thumb... generally went unexplained.
Even First Lady Michelle Obama has been targeted by an outlandish claim. Some say that she ordered her husband's female aide (who supporters of this claim also say was his lover) banished to the Carribean. Everyone involved (including the aide herself) say this is false.
Then there's the other outlandish claim that Michelle was born a man and is transgender.
Then there are some really crazy ones about him, like how the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez funded his election campaign, or this claim that he's The Antichrist (connected to the one about him being a Muslim), or that he planned to start "youth re-education camps" (first suggested by Representative Michelle Bachmann), or even one that claims there was a hidden message in his acceptance speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention telling America to "Serve Satan". (Probably thought up by a Led Zeppelin fan who believed a similar rumor about "Stairway to Heaven".) People never seem to get tired of thinking stuff like this up.
The craziest likely came from Larry Sinclair, a petty criminal specializing in forgery, who spread wild accusations via YouTube involving gay sex, drugs and possible murder committed by the President. At one point reporters apparently took Sinclair seriously enough to attend a press conference he gave, most remarkable for his lawyer's appearance in a kilt, which he explained was intended to secure comfort for his unusually large sexual organs. As he claimed, "Those at the other end of the spectrum find [pants] quite confining." (Reporters quickly stopped taking him seriously after that.)
Last edited:
JudasMyGuide
Ancient Mariner
That depends on what your definition of "did" and "inhale" is, though...
He presented himself as a very strong leader who gave many people the belief that America would come out the 9/11 crisis stronger. In 2004, there was zero doubt that the US was the strongest country in the world and that they would be leaving Iraq soon. Although the Iraqi insurgency had started by then, the true dimensions of the mess only became apparent with the Battle of Fallujah, which started in November that year. Washington was firmly in the grip of the Neo-Cons (anybody remember those anymore?) and the rest of the world trembled at them. Michael Moore was so easy to label as a traitor and someone who hates America that his work had little impact.
Granted, Bush's second term was as disastrous as it gets, and I think only the most table-pounding, flag-waving, line-dancing hardcore old-guard Republicans would still call him a good or successful president.
Reagan introduced tax cuts that only the rich benefited from, laws that made it harder for poor people to improve on their situation, wasted billions of dollars and ruined millions of lives in a War on Drugs that is still going on and still does nothing but waste money and ruin lives, increased national debt by almost 2 trillion dollars, denied AIDS, betrayed his country by selling arms to Khomeini, thus also helping the Islamic Republic of Iran to consolidate and bringing misery upon millions, shipped guns to Afghanistan that were later used by the Taliban, and nearly started a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, and yet people think he was a good president because he knew how to wear a cowboy hat and cut some funding on big government.
As for which president I think was best, I like Ike.
JudasMyGuide
Ancient Mariner
(A vision flashed before my eyes, of a US Presidents Survivor, full of "I vote against Zachary Taylor, because I confuse him with John Tyler" and "Jimmy Carter wanted to literally fu** the Poles - gets/doesn't get my vote"...)
I always thought it interesting the things that happened under Nixon that get overlooked because of Watergate. I'm not a historian, so my facts and understanding may be completely off 
But....
Ending the VietNam War (police action)/Ending the Draft
Signing in the 'war on cancer' which I think had little funding before that time frame
Signing in Title IX for gender equality at universities
Going to China
There was a lot. I think he wasn't so bad a guy....
But....
Ending the VietNam War (police action)/Ending the Draft
Signing in the 'war on cancer' which I think had little funding before that time frame
Signing in Title IX for gender equality at universities
Going to China
There was a lot. I think he wasn't so bad a guy....
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
There's someone on Twitter that has been "offended" by the fact that Marks and Spencer's have a pie called "Empire Pie". I kid you not:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...-colonial-deaths_uk_57d808d7e4b00f741734a468?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...-colonial-deaths_uk_57d808d7e4b00f741734a468?
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
I agree it is disrespectful. Billions died when the Empire destroyed Alderaan.
Hold on, do you actually have proof for that? An experienced space pilot (H. Solo) was quoted saying that the entire imperial star fleet doesn't have enough firepower to destroy a planet. And of all people, the senator of Alderaan happened to not be on the planet when it was supposedly destroyed, but on the very battle station that allegedly fired on it, which was commanded by... her own father!
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
But why would the Empire lie about their own crimes? Also, Mr Solo was himself a scoundrel and more, his words should be taken with a grain of salt. Finally, a respected Jedi master, Mr Kenobi, sensed a disturbance in the Force consistent with the destruction of a planet. The evidence adds up in favor of the official story.
Travis The Dragon
AFTERGLOW!!!
Dr. Eddies Wingman
Brighter than thousand_suns
Coffee!